That has been our whole focus. The first part of the puzzle was the 4 port WAR boards. It is so easy to deploy a repeater and one or more micro cells if they all come in one box and you simply attach antennas.
Then we developed the 5 and 10 MHz channel widths. At 5 MHz width, for instance, you have 11 channels of non overlapping bandwidth in the very crowded 2.4 GHz allotment. 5.x GHz gets the same 4X the number of channels. Each 5 MHz radio can still deliver almost 7 mbps. The last piece of the puzzle was the mesh routing. RIPv2 makes a large network easy to maintain, but it gets fooled easily and cross links confuse it greatly. OSPF is better but is more difficult to set up and you have to design your network as a 2 layer structure, something that any larger network quickly exceeds. Mesh loves cross links and they provide a self healing quality. Take a link away and the loss is detected and routed around. It is easy to setup and "just works". All you really have to enter are the device names and the IP segments you want announced. So, we are nearing the ideal platform -> multiple radios, efficient bandwidth use and superb routing to make use of all of those links. This is what we have all been dreaming about for years, and it is upon us. This is the next generation of wireless people. Lonnie On 2/22/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Or realize that everyone in the world is using the precious 5.8Ghz spectrum > already for long critical links, that are limited to 5.8Ghz for PtP rule > higher SU antenna, or long distance. > 5.3Ghz is an ideal backhaul channel for MESH, up to 7 miles (with 2 ft > dish), and avoid the interference headaches. There is now a HUGE range of > spectrum available at 1 watt, the 5.3G and 5.4Ghz newly allocated > 255Mhzspectrum usable as if this past January. Design mesh networks to > utilize these many channel options, avoid interference, and don't destroy > the industry by unnecessisarilly using the precious 5.8Ghz. In a MESH > design its rare to need to go distances longer than 2 miles, all within the > realm of possibility with low power 5.3G and 5.4G and Omnis and relatively > small panel antennas. > > Likewise, reserve the precious 2.4Ghz for the link to consumer, the spectrum > supported by their laptops. I hope to see the industry smart enough to use > the new 5.4Ghz for MESH type systems, which is one of the reasons it was > allocated for. > > One of the most important tasks for WISPs is to conserve the 5.8Ghz spectrum > and only use it when needed. It is in shortage most compared to the other > ranges. I had hoped and lobbied hard that half of the 5.4Ghz range would be > allowed for higher power and PtP rules, but it had not. Its still perfect > for mesh and OFDM. Don;t be fooled into believing high power is the secret > weapon for mesh, as it is not, LOW power is. Interference and noise is > accumulative and travels for miles around corners and obstructions, unlike > good RSSI and quality signal. Get better RSSI in MESH, by Reducing self > interference and noise, by using a wider range of channel selections and > lower power. 5.3 and 5.4 gives you 350Mhz to select channels from, of equal > specification/propertied RF. Design it into your MESH design. If you can't > transport it in 1watt, redesign radio install locations and density. Every > single additional non-inteferring channel selection, drastically > logrithmically increases the odds of getting a non-interfering channel > selection. 5.4G is the best thinng that happened to MESH. Unfortuneately, > worthless for super cell design. But if MESH embrases 5.4 like it should, > it leaves 5.8Ghz for Super cell. Otherwise the MESH designer is destined to > fail, because it will become a battle that the Super Cell guy won't be able > to give up on until his death, as he has no other option but the range he is > using. The mesh provider has options. > > Tom DeReggi > RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc > IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jack Unger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> > Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 6:29 PM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Mesh Equipment > > > > Unless you expect to handle only very low levels of traffic, avoid mesh > > nodes with only one radio. Choose nodes that have one radio on 2.4 GHz for > > customer connections and one radio on 5.8 GHz for backhauling. In other > > words, separate the "access" traffic from the "backhaul" traffic. Your > > overall throughput capability will be many times greater. > > > > jack > > > > > > ISPlists wrote: > > > >> Does anyone have a good recommendation on some Mesh equipment. I have a > >> small town that wants to provide Internet access to the entire town and > >> I'm thinking of using mesh technology. Any ideas would be great. > >> Thanks, > >> Steve > >> > > > > -- > > Jack Unger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - President, Ask-Wi.Com, Inc. > > Serving the License-Free Wireless Industry Since 1993 > > Author of the WISP Handbook - "Deploying License-Free Wireless WANs" > > True Vendor-Neutral WISP Consulting-Training-Troubleshooting > > Phone (VoIP Over Broadband Wireless) 818-227-4220 www.ask-wi.com > > > > > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
